[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 29, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 45699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-21847]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-38,983]


ZapatA Technologies, Inc.; Hazelton, Pennsylvania; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By applications of May 9 and May 16, 2001, petitioners requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of 
the subject firm to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). The 
denial notice applicable to workers of ZapatA Technologies, Inc., 
Hazelton, Pennsylvania, was issued on April 20, 2001, and was published 
in the Federal Register on May 9, 2001 (66 FR 23733).
    Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under 
the following circumstances:
    (1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously considered 
that the determination complained of was erroneous;
    (2) if it appears that the determination complained of was based on 
a mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered; or
    (3) if in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a 
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of 
the decision.
    The petitioners suggest that fifty percent of their work involved 
technical and support services, and that those intangible articles 
``are now being imported to various plants'' including the ZapatA, 
Inc., Muskogee, Oklahoma plant, other U.S. and world-wide locations. 
The petitioners attached documentation from the company that effective 
February 1, 2001, technical information, business, sales, and technical 
services were to be transferred to a sister plant in Spain.
    Only in very limited instances are service workers certified for 
TAA, namely the worker separations must be caused by a reduced demand 
for their services from a parent or controlling firm or subdivision 
whose workers produce an article and who are currently under a 
certification for TAA. If import impact had been established for the 
production workers at ZapatA Technologies, Inc., Hazelton, 
Pennsylvania, only then, could the petitioners be included in a 
certification for TAA.
    The petitioners also described how the parent company, ZapatA 
International, who also sells crowns and enclosures to the bottling 
industry, has lost business to competitors. The Department's petition 
investigation under the Trade Act of 1974, was specifically for the 
workers at ZapatA Technologies, Inc., Hazelton, Pennsylvania. The 
petition investigation is conducted for the workers' appropriate firm 
or subdivision, not on a company-wide or industry-wide basis.
    The Department's denial of the TAA petition filed on behalf of 
workers producing bottle cap manufacturing machinery at ZapatA finding 
that the contributed importantly criterion of Section 222 of the Trade 
Act of 1974, was not met. The production at the subject firm was 
primarily for the export market. Thus, the workers were not affected by 
increased imports. Although the company did shift production of bottle 
cap manufacturing machinery abroad, that is not a basis for worker 
group certification under the Trade Act.

Conclusion

    After review of the application and investigative findings, I 
conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law 
or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department 
of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 13th day of August 2001.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-21847 Filed 8-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M